Women in Technology

Hear us Roar

  Piracy is Progressive Taxation, and Other Thoughts on the Evolution of Online Distribution
Subject:   Per-channel?
Date:   2002-12-21 08:34:46
From:   timoreilly
Response to: Per-channel?

I don't disagree that being able to choose your own assortment of channels would be a good thing. I was just making the observation that in most equivalent markets, it hasn't worked out that way. There's a tendency towards larger aggregations. And yes, it does theoretically impose an extra cost on the consumer, but in practice, the individual songs (or channels, if TV) would be sold at a sufficiently higher price as to even out the difference.
Full Threads Oldest First

Showing messages 1 through 2 of 2.

  • Per-channel?
    2003-07-28 15:38:30  anonymous2 [View]

    Isn't the tendancy towards larger aggregations really just the providers way of inflating the value ?
    As you point out, the individual channels would "be sold at a sufficiently higher price as to even out the difference".

    The cable companies purposely separate the popular channels and bundle them with the less popular ones so that you get some "perceived" value out of your cash. It's basic marketing strategy.
    And since at least some of their advertising revenue is based on the number of subscriptions they sell to a particular channel, its a good way of getting money for a service no one is really using.
  • Per-channel?
    2003-02-01 15:38:19  anonymous2 [View]

    i think logistics come into play here :

    it essentially costs nothing for a distributor to give you a plethora of possibilities, and when you then have them in front of you, you may find that actually there is another channel there that you go to look at from time to time... or to browse to a song that perhaps you would'nt have considered it it were'nt so easy ...

    perhapse also the financial managability of the affair may come in - with monthly perscriptions, i immagine that things are much more managable for the distributor - not so many huge swings in cash flow... there is also the convenience of the consumer - you do'nt have to make a financial decision every time you grab a song or (if paying per hour for the TV, for example) watch something...

    for me as a consumer, the quality of service aspect looks much better with a service that is more stress free, that is'nt trying to make me buy as much as possible... me and the distributor have made an agreement, i payed my monthly fee, and he gives me the best service she can manage without having to persuade me to do anything else but feel good!

    i'd be interested to hear what someone doing business thinks about what i've written...

    ps: by the way, the original article is excellent - one of the few things i find on the web that i've made a hard copy of!